Appeal No. 1998-2932
Application No. 08/603,680
The examiner contends that a control signal is provided to a specific power switch
in accordance with a received message, causing power to be routed from the power
source but not to the output port associated with that switch. However, the examiner
concludes that it would have been obvious “to be able to route the power from the source
of power through the actual power output port, if so desired, in order to provide a more
compact design by including the power switches within the main module (40)” [Paper No.
10-page 4].
For their part, appellants contend that Shultz merely discloses a processor which
converts a pulse-width-modulated command input signal along line 69 into gated drives to
transistors 30-32 which control a motor 11. While the examiner characterizes the outputs
of processor 40 of Shultz as “power outputs,” appellants contend that Shultz’s outputs are
merely low-power gate drive lines to transistors 30-32 and it is the transistors themselves
that actually route power from bus 20 directly to the motor. In fact, appellants argue, Shultz
does not contain any power outport ports but only MOSFETs 30-32 which are used to
switch coils in the motor. Appellants further state that the examiner’s conclusion regarding
the obviousness of routing power through the actual output port is erroneous because
Shultz contains no suggestion for doing so since Shultz is not directed to power
distribution, but only to motor control in a throttle plate/carburetor application.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007